MEYER,MESKIN,MRACEK. SCHWARTZ, A N D WHEELIHAN failure. T h e reason for this does not lie in a n y lack of attention or inadequate effort allocated t o t h e problem, since very large sums of money have been expended on storage a n d retrieval systems for scientific a n d technological information. Rather, it is due to t h e nature and complexity of t h e information, itself, a n d t o t h e uncertainty and uer?' personal nature of each user's needs." T h e objective of our manual system precisely is t o cope better with t h e complexity of t h e information and t o cater t o personal needs of users. On t h e one hand, t h e direct involvement of scanners in the evaluation, dissemination, a n d user feedback makes them a partner in research a n d allows for a better understanding of t h e nature and complexity of the information needed. On t h e other hand, their direct involvement with t h e above described media. also summarized in Figure 2 , gives t h e m t h e opportunity of optimizing knowledge of the very personal nature of each user's needs a n d of participating more effectively in the information transfer process. THE FUTURE
T h e above mentioned user study, t h e results of which will be published separately, confirm t h a t t h e expectations inherent in our previously mentioned objectives have been realized. Our system is t h e result of a growth achieved over t h e years through adjustments t o changing needs. I n t h e future, we will. of course, maintain the attitude and motivation favoring such dynamic growth a n d permitting adaptation of the system t o changing circumstances. Also our system design activities will continue t o maintain careful evaluation programs both in terms of new developments in t h e field of information science and needs of t h e Celanese Research Co. For instance, the following parameters will continue t o be under constant surveillance for comparative studies: Cost and quality of manual scanning and input. Cost and quality of computer scanning and input. Cost and quality of outside SDI services. Cost and scope of outside computer tapes with information base used internally.
Cost of man-Computer interface. Research staffs acceptance of computer systems and printouts. Currentness of computer tapes and processing. Consistency and relevancy yardsticks achieved. Results of pilot computer operations using commercial computer tapes.
LITERATURE CITED
Allen. Thomas, J.. "Meeting the Technical Information Seeds of Research and Development Projects." Slassachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge. Mass.. Special Printing 314. November 1969. Davison, P. S.. "A Manual System for Selective Dissemination of Information and Current Awareness in Chemistry." reprint of paper read to The Chemical Society Meeting. Southampton. England. September 1969. S.D.C. Bulletin. 2:65-73 (1969). Davison. P. S.. Letter to the Editor. A m w 110c.. 19 (11. 104-5 (.January 1968). Davison. P. S..and D. A. R. Mathews, "Assessment of Information Services." A S L I B Proceedinps, 21 ( 7 1. 280-3 (duly 19691. Graham. R. A,. A . E. Lee. and R. L. Meyer. "The Creation of a New Technical Information Center for a Dixsersified Chemical Corporation." J . Chem. Doc.. 8 (21, 60-6 (19631. Hoshovsky, A. G.. "Analysis of Experimental and Operational SDI Services." 196T. Office of Aerospace Research Report. OAR 69-0016. July 20, 1969. Housman. E. M.. ..Survey of Current Systems for Selective Dissemination of Information." American Society for Information Science Special Interest Group Report SIG SDI, June 1969. Meyer. R. L.. and J. H. Schwartz. "The Literature Survey: Policy fnr Performance. Evaluation and Use," Specia! Librnries. 61 (3). 122-6 (March 19701. Skolnik, Herman, and Ruth E. C u r t i s "A Mechanized Information System for Many Outputs from One Input." J . Chem. Doc.. 8 (11 (February 19681. \'an Allen. N. K.. and R. \V. Gibson Jr.. "System on Automotive Safety Information." Specia! Libraries. 59 (1). 251-7 (April 19681.
User Study of Current Awareness and SDI at Celanese Research Company ROGER L. MEYER, AMY J. MESKIN, JOHN J. MRACEK, JAMES H. SCHWARTZ, and EMMA C. WHEELIHAN Celanese Research Co., P.O. Box 1000, Summit, N. J. 07901 Received September 14, 1970
This paper presents t h e results of a user s t u d y conducted in February 1970 with a view of assessing the usage of and needs for current awareness services a t Celanese Research Company ( C R C ) . These services, which consist of a weekly R e c i e u of Current Technical Literature, a weekly Patent Builetin. and Selective Dissemination of Information ( S D I ) . have been described in a previous paper." The study was carried out in line with our permanent dialogue with the research staff. t h e importance of which 24
Journal of Chemical Documentation, Vol. 1 1 , No. 1,
1971
was stressed in t h e same paper. Apart from obtaining information for assessment of needs and usage. we also wanted t o measure cost effectiveness of the services and let the research staff determine their value for research projects. W e also wanted t o know more about the informational behavior of the research staff so a s t o reinforce fLirther t h e technical information staff's involvement with the research teams. This is in line with our belief t h a t in order t o achieve effective permanent person t o person
USERSTUDY OF CURRENT AWARENESS A N D SDI The Review of C u r r e n t Technical Literature, Pafent Bullefin, and Selective Dissemination of Information (SDI) service have been submitted (February 1 9 7 0 ) to a user study by written questionnaire. The response was 86%. O n the basis that the three services cost the equivalent of 4 0 minutes per week of the average professional's time, 6 2 % of the staff rated their value high and 8 6 % high and medium. If they were to receive none of the services, 9 2 % considered that the additional time they would spend in meeting their current awareness needs would be more than 40 minutes per week. The effects of the services on research projects have been rated medium and high by 38%. SDI is read regularly/frequently by 94%; the Review by 89%; and the Pafent Bulletin by 55.5%. Heavy/moderate reliance on SDI is 76%; on the Review 77%; and on the Patent Bulletin 62%.
ccimmunications with the user, t h e knowledge of' t h e user's 1iaI)its and needs is a n essential prerequisite. I n this sense relating current awareness t o users is primarily a sociological function which conditions transfer of knowledge and information. Studies of information habits of' industrial research workers are not new. For instance among several others. those of Alien: SIaizell.' and Paisley - made important contributions t o a better understanding of the informational behavior of' engineers a n d scientists. Their work provided u s with basic inspirations toward t h e realization of our s t u d y . QUESTIONNAIRE, APPROACH, A N D RESPONSE
T h e literature on techniques employed for user studies
in the field of technical information is a b u n d a n t . ' F r o m the various methods. we selected the written questionnaire with a n optional indication of t h e respondent's name. The contents a s well a s the arrangement of t h e questionnaire (which m a y be obtained from one of t h e authors.J. ,J. MI were based on i n p u t s from various sources: Literature on user study techniques in technical information." ' Managers at CRC (individual interviews. submittal of draft questionnaires. and meetings,. Random selection of' research staff members at CRC (individual interviews and submittal of' draft questionnaires. Technical Information Committee at CRC (at a special meeting members representing each research section were requested to present ideas as t o what would be appropriate questions which would lead to meaningful data on usage and needs,. Our own user study experience reinforced through the strong intertace with the research staff during the creation of the new Technical Information Center in 1967 described in an earlier paper.' T h e total response t o t h e questionnaire was 86'; of t h e staff. T h e following is a numerical break down by cont rihut ing groups: x \ 1 , 3 , , , , ~ t ~ t ~ l ~ ~~!;l, lc > w l )
President Vice-predent Directrrr!: .Ilanagers Section heads (;roup leaders
#ne*.llii, X,II (;r,,,,,) Senior research associates Staff associates
Research associates
20
Senior research chemists Research chemsts
53
Senior research engineers Research engineers
18
Other
4
I n some cases t h e response b y the section head a n d group leader group seemed t o be more in line with t h e response expressed by t h e management group and. in other cases, with t h e research staff groups. Accordingly, in the text below. t h e response of t h e section head a n d group leader group has sometimes been reported with the management group, a n d sometimes with t h e research staff groups. Each time this has been done, it is explicitly stated. VALUE
OF
CURRENT AWARENESS SERVICES A N D S.D.I. TO THE STAFF
I n order t o come up with a n assessment on what t h e staff thinks of t h e value of our current awareness services, we indicated i n t h e questionnaire, a s a yardstick of measurement. t h a t t h e package of three current awareness services a t CRC costs t h e equivalent of 40 minutes per week of the average professional's time. I n one question, t h e staff was asked whether. in their judgment, the value of t h e services they received in relation t o this yardstick is high. medium. or low. T h e response t o t h e question was a s follows:
A peak of 7 0 5 high was recorded for t h e senior research associate and t h e research associate category. This was t o be expected, since this group is particularly active in transferring information within work groups a n d from one work group t o another. I n another question we asked the staff if they were t o provide entirely for their own current awareness needsLe., if they were t o receive none of t h e current awareness services now provided-would t h e additional time spent in meeting their current awareness needs be more, the same. or less than 40 minutes per week. T h e response was: LIore
92.0'
c
Same
I.es.
3.2'r
4.8'r
Journal of Chemical Documentation, Vol. 11, No. T , 1971
25
MEYER,MESKIN,MRACEK, SCHWARTZ. A N D WHEELIHAN REVIEW OF CURRENT TECHNICAL LITERATURE
A set of four questions was submitted t o all staff members: 1. How often do you read the Recieu of Current Technical Literature!
Only 9.1Ir of' the managerial group (president. vicepresident. directors. managers) appear t o read t h e Patent Bulletin regularly. The section head group leader group account for 18.2', regularly and 31.8'r frequently. The senior research chemists research chemists group a.ppeared t o be t h e biggest readers with 4 Y r regularly. I t is worth noting t h a t the section heads. research associates. research chemists and research engineers grouped together accounted for approximately 58' regularly frequently. I t is also interesting to note t h e difference in the readership pattern between t h e research chemist (43' regularly) and the research engineer group 127.8'; regularly 1 which would be due t o differences in the nature of projects and informational needs. We wonder whether this difference should be attributed t o t h e difference in informational behavior between scientists and technologists which has been discussed in t h e literature.'. 2. Do you read t h e Patent Buiietin by section. by subjects using t h e index. by scanning t h e entire bulletin. other? I
As would be expected. we found a difference between the reading behavior of t h e research staff and management if one considers t h a t the managerial group (directors. section heads. group leaders) account for 5 4 ' r regularly frequently a n d t h e research staff for 89.67 r e g u l a r l y frequently. 2. Do you read the R e u e u by section. by scanning the entire bulletin or otherwise3 H\-~ e c t i r i n
Scanninn enrire H i ~ r i ~ i
64.2' r
i34.0'1
Other
1.8' c
Interdisciplinary interests. and t h e need for a crosssectional view of t h e published information, may be the reasons for a majority of 6 4 . 2 5 scanning the entire Recielc. This would be confirmed by answers t o question 3 below related t o t h e reliance pattern. 3. How much do you rely on t h e Review for up-tod a t e general information from journals, government reports. etc.? Heivilv
\Ioderatel\
Slinhrlv
Sot ar all
33.1' 1
44.1';
19.7':
3.1'1
As would be expected. we found t h a t there is a n inverse relationship between t h e response of the managerial group and the research staff-i.e.. the reliance is t h e lowest a t t h e managerial level and the highest on t h e research staff level as shown below. This may be due t o differences in information needs between managers and research staff reported in the literature." Pres., v-pres.. directors. and managers: Section heads. group leaders: Research staff:
I
n\ w r i r i n 27.6';
Add index 0 1 keviroids
Breakdiian intn more specihc xectiiini
So change
Orher
19.07
24.85
44.6$
11.6':
Management (excluding section heads and group leaders) seems t o be most in favor of changes-Le.. 60'; for either adding a n index of keywords or breaking down into more specific sections with a preference toward t h e latter. T h e same trend is apparent for t h e research staffincluding section heads a n d group leaders-but t o a lesser extent as evidenced by a 45'; of "no change."
til?
111'
4"2(
Ornei
ex
25.9' >
c
4.3'
Hraiilv
Sltderarel\
dIcIirlv
3O.Fc
30.8'1
29.9'
Stll ,il
A set of four questions was submitted t o t h e research staff. 1. How often d o you read t h e Patent Buiietzn? 26
Journal of Chemical Documentotion, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1971
illl
8.5'
